new logger api?
Hi, just created https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-674 any thought about it? the goal is mainly to allow to use something else than JUL. The proposed patch uses a system property but it can be something else. The other topic of this jira is the usage of getStackTrace() in the JUL implementation which is too costly IMO. - Romain
Re: new logger api?
+1 The getStackTrace only hits us if we throw an Exception, right? The problem is that due to the additional wrapper handler we always have a 'mismatch' in the StackTrace... I'm tempted to move to native jul anyway... LieGrue, strub - Original Message - > From: Romain Manni-Bucau > To: dev@openwebbeans.apache.org > Cc: > Sent: Monday, June 11, 2012 1:28 PM > Subject: new logger api? > > Hi, > > just created https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-674 > > any thought about it? > > the goal is mainly to allow to use something else than JUL. The proposed > patch uses a system property but it can be something else. > > The other topic of this jira is the usage of getStackTrace() in the JUL > implementation which is too costly IMO. > > - Romain >
Re: new logger api?
no:
private void wblLog(Level level, String messageKey)
{
if (logger.isLoggable(level))
{
logger.logp(level, caller.getName(),
Thread.currentThread().getStackTrace()[3].getMethodName(), messageKey);
}
}
well if we move to natve JUL we'll need to keep a factory to allow
subclasses to switch of implementation as cxf does.
- Romain
2012/6/11 Mark Struberg
> +1
>
> The getStackTrace only hits us if we throw an Exception, right? The
> problem is that due to the additional wrapper handler we always have a
> 'mismatch' in the StackTrace...
>
> I'm tempted to move to native jul anyway...
>
>
> LieGrue,
> strub
>
>
>
> - Original Message -
> > From: Romain Manni-Bucau
> > To: dev@openwebbeans.apache.org
> > Cc:
> > Sent: Monday, June 11, 2012 1:28 PM
> > Subject: new logger api?
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > just created https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-674
> >
> > any thought about it?
> >
> > the goal is mainly to allow to use something else than JUL. The proposed
> > patch uses a system property but it can be something else.
> >
> > The other topic of this jira is the usage of getStackTrace() in the JUL
> > implementation which is too costly IMO.
> >
> > - Romain
> >
>
Re: new logger api?
any other opinion?
do we move to JULI directly?
- Romain
2012/6/11 Romain Manni-Bucau
> no:
>
> private void wblLog(Level level, String messageKey)
> {
> if (logger.isLoggable(level))
> {
> logger.logp(level, caller.getName(),
> Thread.currentThread().getStackTrace()[3].getMethodName(), messageKey);
> }
> }
>
> well if we move to natve JUL we'll need to keep a factory to allow
> subclasses to switch of implementation as cxf does.
>
> - Romain
>
>
>
> 2012/6/11 Mark Struberg
>
>> +1
>>
>> The getStackTrace only hits us if we throw an Exception, right? The
>> problem is that due to the additional wrapper handler we always have a
>> 'mismatch' in the StackTrace...
>>
>> I'm tempted to move to native jul anyway...
>>
>>
>> LieGrue,
>> strub
>>
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message -
>> > From: Romain Manni-Bucau
>> > To: dev@openwebbeans.apache.org
>> > Cc:
>> > Sent: Monday, June 11, 2012 1:28 PM
>> > Subject: new logger api?
>> >
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > just created https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-674
>> >
>> > any thought about it?
>> >
>> > the goal is mainly to allow to use something else than JUL. The proposed
>> > patch uses a system property but it can be something else.
>> >
>> > The other topic of this jira is the usage of getStackTrace() in the JUL
>> > implementation which is too costly IMO.
>> >
>> > - Romain
>> >
>>
>
>
Re: new logger api?
Yes, that will make things simpler to integrate ;-)
JLouis
2012/6/25 Romain Manni-Bucau
> any other opinion?
>
> do we move to JULI directly?
>
> - Romain
>
>
> 2012/6/11 Romain Manni-Bucau
>
> > no:
> >
> > private void wblLog(Level level, String messageKey)
> > {
> > if (logger.isLoggable(level))
> > {
> > logger.logp(level, caller.getName(),
> > Thread.currentThread().getStackTrace()[3].getMethodName(), messageKey);
> > }
> > }
> >
> > well if we move to natve JUL we'll need to keep a factory to allow
> > subclasses to switch of implementation as cxf does.
> >
> > - Romain
> >
> >
> >
> > 2012/6/11 Mark Struberg
> >
> >> +1
> >>
> >> The getStackTrace only hits us if we throw an Exception, right? The
> >> problem is that due to the additional wrapper handler we always have a
> >> 'mismatch' in the StackTrace...
> >>
> >> I'm tempted to move to native jul anyway...
> >>
> >>
> >> LieGrue,
> >> strub
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> - Original Message -
> >> > From: Romain Manni-Bucau
> >> > To: dev@openwebbeans.apache.org
> >> > Cc:
> >> > Sent: Monday, June 11, 2012 1:28 PM
> >> > Subject: new logger api?
> >> >
> >> > Hi,
> >> >
> >> > just created https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-674
> >> >
> >> > any thought about it?
> >> >
> >> > the goal is mainly to allow to use something else than JUL. The
> proposed
> >> > patch uses a system property but it can be something else.
> >> >
> >> > The other topic of this jira is the usage of getStackTrace() in the
> JUL
> >> > implementation which is too costly IMO.
> >> >
> >> > - Romain
> >> >
> >>
> >
> >
>
Re: new logger api?
gimme a few days plz, currently holding workshops the next 2 days.
LieGrue,
strub
- Original Message -
> From: Jean-Louis MONTEIRO
> To: dev@openwebbeans.apache.org
> Cc:
> Sent: Monday, June 25, 2012 8:15 AM
> Subject: Re: new logger api?
>
> Yes, that will make things simpler to integrate ;-)
>
> JLouis
>
> 2012/6/25 Romain Manni-Bucau
>
>> any other opinion?
>>
>> do we move to JULI directly?
>>
>> - Romain
>>
>>
>> 2012/6/11 Romain Manni-Bucau
>>
>> > no:
>> >
>> > private void wblLog(Level level, String messageKey)
>> > {
>> > if (logger.isLoggable(level))
>> > {
>> > logger.logp(level, caller.getName(),
>> > Thread.currentThread().getStackTrace()[3].getMethodName(),
> messageKey);
>> > }
>> > }
>> >
>> > well if we move to natve JUL we'll need to keep a factory to allow
>> > subclasses to switch of implementation as cxf does.
>> >
>> > - Romain
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > 2012/6/11 Mark Struberg
>> >
>> >> +1
>> >>
>> >> The getStackTrace only hits us if we throw an Exception, right?
> The
>> >> problem is that due to the additional wrapper handler we always
> have a
>> >> 'mismatch' in the StackTrace...
>> >>
>> >> I'm tempted to move to native jul anyway...
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> LieGrue,
>> >> strub
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> - Original Message -
>> >> > From: Romain Manni-Bucau
>> >> > To: dev@openwebbeans.apache.org
>> >> > Cc:
>> >> > Sent: Monday, June 11, 2012 1:28 PM
>> >> > Subject: new logger api?
>> >> >
>> >> > Hi,
>> >> >
>> >> > just created https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-674
>> >> >
>> >> > any thought about it?
>> >> >
>> >> > the goal is mainly to allow to use something else than JUL.
> The
>> proposed
>> >> > patch uses a system property but it can be something else.
>> >> >
>> >> > The other topic of this jira is the usage of getStackTrace()
> in the
>> JUL
>> >> > implementation which is too costly IMO.
>> >> >
>> >> > - Romain
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>>
>
Re: new logger api?
You still have nights ;-)
Was a joke, sorry.
JLouis
2012/6/25 Mark Struberg
> gimme a few days plz, currently holding workshops the next 2 days.
>
> LieGrue,
> strub
>
>
>
> - Original Message -
> > From: Jean-Louis MONTEIRO
> > To: dev@openwebbeans.apache.org
> > Cc:
> > Sent: Monday, June 25, 2012 8:15 AM
> > Subject: Re: new logger api?
> >
> > Yes, that will make things simpler to integrate ;-)
> >
> > JLouis
> >
> > 2012/6/25 Romain Manni-Bucau
> >
> >> any other opinion?
> >>
> >> do we move to JULI directly?
> >>
> >> - Romain
> >>
> >>
> >> 2012/6/11 Romain Manni-Bucau
> >>
> >> > no:
> >> >
> >> > private void wblLog(Level level, String messageKey)
> >> > {
> >> > if (logger.isLoggable(level))
> >> > {
> >> > logger.logp(level, caller.getName(),
> >> > Thread.currentThread().getStackTrace()[3].getMethodName(),
> > messageKey);
> >> > }
> >> > }
> >> >
> >> > well if we move to natve JUL we'll need to keep a factory to allow
> >> > subclasses to switch of implementation as cxf does.
> >> >
> >> > - Romain
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > 2012/6/11 Mark Struberg
> >> >
> >> >> +1
> >> >>
> >> >> The getStackTrace only hits us if we throw an Exception, right?
> > The
> >> >> problem is that due to the additional wrapper handler we always
> > have a
> >> >> 'mismatch' in the StackTrace...
> >> >>
> >> >> I'm tempted to move to native jul anyway...
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> LieGrue,
> >> >> strub
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> - Original Message -
> >> >> > From: Romain Manni-Bucau
> >> >> > To: dev@openwebbeans.apache.org
> >> >> > Cc:
> >> >> > Sent: Monday, June 11, 2012 1:28 PM
> >> >> > Subject: new logger api?
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Hi,
> >> >> >
> >> >> > just created https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-674
> >> >> >
> >> >> > any thought about it?
> >> >> >
> >> >> > the goal is mainly to allow to use something else than JUL.
> > The
> >> proposed
> >> >> > patch uses a system property but it can be something else.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > The other topic of this jira is the usage of getStackTrace()
> > in the
> >> JUL
> >> >> > implementation which is too costly IMO.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > - Romain
> >> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> >
>
Re: new logger api?
Or friends ;)
Le 25 juin 2012 08:26, "Jean-Louis MONTEIRO" a écrit :
> You still have nights ;-)
>
>
> Was a joke, sorry.
> JLouis
>
> 2012/6/25 Mark Struberg
>
> > gimme a few days plz, currently holding workshops the next 2 days.
> >
> > LieGrue,
> > strub
> >
> >
> >
> > - Original Message -
> > > From: Jean-Louis MONTEIRO
> > > To: dev@openwebbeans.apache.org
> > > Cc:
> > > Sent: Monday, June 25, 2012 8:15 AM
> > > Subject: Re: new logger api?
> > >
> > > Yes, that will make things simpler to integrate ;-)
> > >
> > > JLouis
> > >
> > > 2012/6/25 Romain Manni-Bucau
> > >
> > >> any other opinion?
> > >>
> > >> do we move to JULI directly?
> > >>
> > >> - Romain
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> 2012/6/11 Romain Manni-Bucau
> > >>
> > >> > no:
> > >> >
> > >> > private void wblLog(Level level, String messageKey)
> > >> > {
> > >> > if (logger.isLoggable(level))
> > >> > {
> > >> > logger.logp(level, caller.getName(),
> > >> > Thread.currentThread().getStackTrace()[3].getMethodName(),
> > > messageKey);
> > >> > }
> > >> > }
> > >> >
> > >> > well if we move to natve JUL we'll need to keep a factory to allow
> > >> > subclasses to switch of implementation as cxf does.
> > >> >
> > >> > - Romain
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > 2012/6/11 Mark Struberg
> > >> >
> > >> >> +1
> > >> >>
> > >> >> The getStackTrace only hits us if we throw an Exception, right?
> > > The
> > >> >> problem is that due to the additional wrapper handler we always
> > > have a
> > >> >> 'mismatch' in the StackTrace...
> > >> >>
> > >> >> I'm tempted to move to native jul anyway...
> > >> >>
> > >> >>
> > >> >> LieGrue,
> > >> >> strub
> > >> >>
> > >> >>
> > >> >>
> > >> >> - Original Message -
> > >> >> > From: Romain Manni-Bucau
> > >> >> > To: dev@openwebbeans.apache.org
> > >> >> > Cc:
> > >> >> > Sent: Monday, June 11, 2012 1:28 PM
> > >> >> > Subject: new logger api?
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> > Hi,
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> > just created https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-674
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> > any thought about it?
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> > the goal is mainly to allow to use something else than JUL.
> > > The
> > >> proposed
> > >> >> > patch uses a system property but it can be something else.
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> > The other topic of this jira is the usage of getStackTrace()
> > > in the
> > >> JUL
> > >> >> > implementation which is too costly IMO.
> > >> >> >
> > >> >> > - Romain
> > >> >> >
> > >> >>
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >>
> > >
> >
>
Re: new logger api?
Mark,
That be a good starting point for me to submit a patch if you agree.
Jean-Louis
2012/6/25 Romain Manni-Bucau
> Or friends ;)
> Le 25 juin 2012 08:26, "Jean-Louis MONTEIRO" a écrit
> :
>
> > You still have nights ;-)
> >
> >
> > Was a joke, sorry.
> > JLouis
> >
> > 2012/6/25 Mark Struberg
> >
> > > gimme a few days plz, currently holding workshops the next 2 days.
> > >
> > > LieGrue,
> > > strub
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > - Original Message -
> > > > From: Jean-Louis MONTEIRO
> > > > To: dev@openwebbeans.apache.org
> > > > Cc:
> > > > Sent: Monday, June 25, 2012 8:15 AM
> > > > Subject: Re: new logger api?
> > > >
> > > > Yes, that will make things simpler to integrate ;-)
> > > >
> > > > JLouis
> > > >
> > > > 2012/6/25 Romain Manni-Bucau
> > > >
> > > >> any other opinion?
> > > >>
> > > >> do we move to JULI directly?
> > > >>
> > > >> - Romain
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> 2012/6/11 Romain Manni-Bucau
> > > >>
> > > >> > no:
> > > >> >
> > > >> > private void wblLog(Level level, String messageKey)
> > > >> > {
> > > >> > if (logger.isLoggable(level))
> > > >> > {
> > > >> > logger.logp(level, caller.getName(),
> > > >> > Thread.currentThread().getStackTrace()[3].getMethodName(),
> > > > messageKey);
> > > >> > }
> > > >> > }
> > > >> >
> > > >> > well if we move to natve JUL we'll need to keep a factory to
> allow
> > > >> > subclasses to switch of implementation as cxf does.
> > > >> >
> > > >> > - Romain
> > > >> >
> > > >> >
> > > >> >
> > > >> > 2012/6/11 Mark Struberg
> > > >> >
> > > >> >> +1
> > > >> >>
> > > >> >> The getStackTrace only hits us if we throw an Exception, right?
> > > > The
> > > >> >> problem is that due to the additional wrapper handler we always
> > > > have a
> > > >> >> 'mismatch' in the StackTrace...
> > > >> >>
> > > >> >> I'm tempted to move to native jul anyway...
> > > >> >>
> > > >> >>
> > > >> >> LieGrue,
> > > >> >> strub
> > > >> >>
> > > >> >>
> > > >> >>
> > > >> >> - Original Message -
> > > >> >> > From: Romain Manni-Bucau
> > > >> >> > To: dev@openwebbeans.apache.org
> > > >> >> > Cc:
> > > >> >> > Sent: Monday, June 11, 2012 1:28 PM
> > > >> >> > Subject: new logger api?
> > > >> >> >
> > > >> >> > Hi,
> > > >> >> >
> > > >> >> > just created https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-674
> > > >> >> >
> > > >> >> > any thought about it?
> > > >> >> >
> > > >> >> > the goal is mainly to allow to use something else than JUL.
> > > > The
> > > >> proposed
> > > >> >> > patch uses a system property but it can be something else.
> > > >> >> >
> > > >> >> > The other topic of this jira is the usage of getStackTrace()
> > > > in the
> > > >> JUL
> > > >> >> > implementation which is too costly IMO.
> > > >> >> >
> > > >> >> > - Romain
> > > >> >> >
> > > >> >>
> > > >> >
> > > >> >
> > > >>
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
Re: new logger api?
full ack, yeaaa we found a volunteer - txs romain :D
Nah, serious. We should do a VOTE about whether to remove the WebBeansLogger or
not.
LieGrue,
strub
- Original Message -
> From: Jean-Louis MONTEIRO
> To: dev@openwebbeans.apache.org
> Cc:
> Sent: Monday, June 25, 2012 10:46 AM
> Subject: Re: new logger api?
>
> Mark,
>
> That be a good starting point for me to submit a patch if you agree.
>
> Jean-Louis
>
> 2012/6/25 Romain Manni-Bucau
>
>> Or friends ;)
>> Le 25 juin 2012 08:26, "Jean-Louis MONTEIRO"
> a écrit
>> :
>>
>> > You still have nights ;-)
>> >
>> >
>> > Was a joke, sorry.
>> > JLouis
>> >
>> > 2012/6/25 Mark Struberg
>> >
>> > > gimme a few days plz, currently holding workshops the next 2
> days.
>> > >
>> > > LieGrue,
>> > > strub
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > - Original Message -
>> > > > From: Jean-Louis MONTEIRO
>> > > > To: dev@openwebbeans.apache.org
>> > > > Cc:
>> > > > Sent: Monday, June 25, 2012 8:15 AM
>> > > > Subject: Re: new logger api?
>> > > >
>> > > > Yes, that will make things simpler to integrate ;-)
>> > > >
>> > > > JLouis
>> > > >
>> > > > 2012/6/25 Romain Manni-Bucau
>> > > >
>> > > >> any other opinion?
>> > > >>
>> > > >> do we move to JULI directly?
>> > > >>
>> > > >> - Romain
>> > > >>
>> > > >>
>> > > >> 2012/6/11 Romain Manni-Bucau
>
>> > > >>
>> > > >> > no:
>> > > >> >
>> > > >> > private void wblLog(Level level, String
> messageKey)
>> > > >> > {
>> > > >> > if (logger.isLoggable(level))
>> > > >> > {
>> > > >> > logger.logp(level, caller.getName(),
>> > > >> >
> Thread.currentThread().getStackTrace()[3].getMethodName(),
>> > > > messageKey);
>> > > >> > }
>> > > >> > }
>> > > >> >
>> > > >> > well if we move to natve JUL we'll need to
> keep a factory to
>> allow
>> > > >> > subclasses to switch of implementation as cxf
> does.
>> > > >> >
>> > > >> > - Romain
>> > > >> >
>> > > >> >
>> > > >> >
>> > > >> > 2012/6/11 Mark Struberg
>> > > >> >
>> > > >> >> +1
>> > > >> >>
>> > > >> >> The getStackTrace only hits us if we throw an
> Exception, right?
>> > > > The
>> > > >> >> problem is that due to the additional wrapper
> handler we always
>> > > > have a
>> > > >> >> 'mismatch' in the StackTrace...
>> > > >> >>
>> > > >> >> I'm tempted to move to native jul
> anyway...
>> > > >> >>
>> > > >> >>
>> > > >> >> LieGrue,
>> > > >> >> strub
>> > > >> >>
>> > > >> >>
>> > > >> >>
>> > > >> >> - Original Message -
>> > > >> >> > From: Romain Manni-Bucau
>
>> > > >> >> > To: dev@openwebbeans.apache.org
>> > > >> >> > Cc:
>> > > >> >> > Sent: Monday, June 11, 2012 1:28 PM
>> > > >> >> > Subject: new logger api?
>> > > >> >> >
>> > > >> >> > Hi,
>> > > >> >> >
>> > > >> >> > just created
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-674
>> > > >> >> >
>> > > >> >> > any thought about it?
>> > > >> >> >
>> > > >> >> > the goal is mainly to allow to use
> something else than JUL.
>> > > > The
>> > > >> proposed
>> > > >> >> > patch uses a system property but it can
> be something else.
>> > > >> >> >
>> > > >> >> > The other topic of this jira is the usage
> of getStackTrace()
>> > > > in the
>> > > >> JUL
>> > > >> >> > implementation which is too costly IMO.
>> > > >> >> >
>> > > >> >> > - Romain
>> > > >> >> >
>> > > >> >>
>> > > >> >
>> > > >> >
>> > > >>
>> > > >
>> > >
>> >
>>
>
Re: new logger api?
I think questions are:
1) do we remove WebBeansLogger? --> JUL
2) do we add a thin layer to allow to use other logging API? (add or reuse
if we go for slf4j for instance)
- Romain
2012/6/25 Mark Struberg
> full ack, yeaaa we found a volunteer - txs romain :D
>
>
> Nah, serious. We should do a VOTE about whether to remove the
> WebBeansLogger or not.
>
> LieGrue,
> strub
>
>
>
> - Original Message -
> > From: Jean-Louis MONTEIRO
> > To: dev@openwebbeans.apache.org
> > Cc:
> > Sent: Monday, June 25, 2012 10:46 AM
> > Subject: Re: new logger api?
> >
> > Mark,
> >
> > That be a good starting point for me to submit a patch if you agree.
> >
> > Jean-Louis
> >
> > 2012/6/25 Romain Manni-Bucau
> >
> >> Or friends ;)
> >> Le 25 juin 2012 08:26, "Jean-Louis MONTEIRO"
> > a écrit
> >> :
> >>
> >> > You still have nights ;-)
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > Was a joke, sorry.
> >> > JLouis
> >> >
> >> > 2012/6/25 Mark Struberg
> >> >
> >> > > gimme a few days plz, currently holding workshops the next 2
> > days.
> >> > >
> >> > > LieGrue,
> >> > > strub
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > > - Original Message -
> >> > > > From: Jean-Louis MONTEIRO
> >> > > > To: dev@openwebbeans.apache.org
> >> > > > Cc:
> >> > > > Sent: Monday, June 25, 2012 8:15 AM
> >> > > > Subject: Re: new logger api?
> >> > > >
> >> > > > Yes, that will make things simpler to integrate ;-)
> >> > > >
> >> > > > JLouis
> >> > > >
> >> > > > 2012/6/25 Romain Manni-Bucau
> >> > > >
> >> > > >> any other opinion?
> >> > > >>
> >> > > >> do we move to JULI directly?
> >> > > >>
> >> > > >> - Romain
> >> > > >>
> >> > > >>
> >> > > >> 2012/6/11 Romain Manni-Bucau
> >
> >> > > >>
> >> > > >> > no:
> >> > > >> >
> >> > > >> > private void wblLog(Level level, String
> > messageKey)
> >> > > >> > {
> >> > > >> > if (logger.isLoggable(level))
> >> > > >> > {
> >> > > >> > logger.logp(level, caller.getName(),
> >> > > >> >
> > Thread.currentThread().getStackTrace()[3].getMethodName(),
> >> > > > messageKey);
> >> > > >> > }
> >> > > >> > }
> >> > > >> >
> >> > > >> > well if we move to natve JUL we'll need to
> > keep a factory to
> >> allow
> >> > > >> > subclasses to switch of implementation as cxf
> > does.
> >> > > >> >
> >> > > >> > - Romain
> >> > > >> >
> >> > > >> >
> >> > > >> >
> >> > > >> > 2012/6/11 Mark Struberg
> >> > > >> >
> >> > > >> >> +1
> >> > > >> >>
> >> > > >> >> The getStackTrace only hits us if we throw an
> > Exception, right?
> >> > > > The
> >> > > >> >> problem is that due to the additional wrapper
> > handler we always
> >> > > > have a
> >> > > >> >> 'mismatch' in the StackTrace...
> >> > > >> >>
> >> > > >> >> I'm tempted to move to native jul
> > anyway...
> >> > > >> >>
> >> > > >> >>
> >> > > >> >> LieGrue,
> >> > > >> >> strub
> >> > > >> >>
> >> > > >> >>
> >> > > >> >>
> >> > > >> >> - Original Message -
> >> > > >> >> > From: Romain Manni-Bucau
> >
> >> > > >> >> > To: dev@openwebbeans.apache.org
> >> > > >> >> > Cc:
> >> > > >> >> > Sent: Monday, June 11, 2012 1:28 PM
> >> > > >> >> > Subject: new logger api?
> >> > > >> >> >
> >> > > >> >> > Hi,
> >> > > >> >> >
> >> > > >> >> > just created
> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-674
> >> > > >> >> >
> >> > > >> >> > any thought about it?
> >> > > >> >> >
> >> > > >> >> > the goal is mainly to allow to use
> > something else than JUL.
> >> > > > The
> >> > > >> proposed
> >> > > >> >> > patch uses a system property but it can
> > be something else.
> >> > > >> >> >
> >> > > >> >> > The other topic of this jira is the usage
> > of getStackTrace()
> >> > > > in the
> >> > > >> JUL
> >> > > >> >> > implementation which is too costly IMO.
> >> > > >> >> >
> >> > > >> >> > - Romain
> >> > > >> >> >
> >> > > >> >>
> >> > > >> >
> >> > > >> >
> >> > > >>
> >> > > >
> >> > >
> >> >
> >>
> >
>
Re: new logger api?
I guess a new thread must be opened with [VOTE].
Anyway, if we wanna support other logging API, may be we could just review
the factory.
Thoughts?
JLouis
2012/6/25 Romain Manni-Bucau
> I think questions are:
> 1) do we remove WebBeansLogger? --> JUL
> 2) do we add a thin layer to allow to use other logging API? (add or reuse
> if we go for slf4j for instance)
>
> - Romain
>
>
> 2012/6/25 Mark Struberg
>
> > full ack, yeaaa we found a volunteer - txs romain :D
> >
> >
> > Nah, serious. We should do a VOTE about whether to remove the
> > WebBeansLogger or not.
> >
> > LieGrue,
> > strub
> >
> >
> >
> > - Original Message -
> > > From: Jean-Louis MONTEIRO
> > > To: dev@openwebbeans.apache.org
> > > Cc:
> > > Sent: Monday, June 25, 2012 10:46 AM
> > > Subject: Re: new logger api?
> > >
> > > Mark,
> > >
> > > That be a good starting point for me to submit a patch if you agree.
> > >
> > > Jean-Louis
> > >
> > > 2012/6/25 Romain Manni-Bucau
> > >
> > >> Or friends ;)
> > >> Le 25 juin 2012 08:26, "Jean-Louis MONTEIRO"
> > > a écrit
> > >> :
> > >>
> > >> > You still have nights ;-)
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > Was a joke, sorry.
> > >> > JLouis
> > >> >
> > >> > 2012/6/25 Mark Struberg
> > >> >
> > >> > > gimme a few days plz, currently holding workshops the next 2
> > > days.
> > >> > >
> > >> > > LieGrue,
> > >> > > strub
> > >> > >
> > >> > >
> > >> > >
> > >> > > - Original Message -
> > >> > > > From: Jean-Louis MONTEIRO
> > >> > > > To: dev@openwebbeans.apache.org
> > >> > > > Cc:
> > >> > > > Sent: Monday, June 25, 2012 8:15 AM
> > >> > > > Subject: Re: new logger api?
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > Yes, that will make things simpler to integrate ;-)
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > JLouis
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > 2012/6/25 Romain Manni-Bucau
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > >> any other opinion?
> > >> > > >>
> > >> > > >> do we move to JULI directly?
> > >> > > >>
> > >> > > >> - Romain
> > >> > > >>
> > >> > > >>
> > >> > > >> 2012/6/11 Romain Manni-Bucau
> > >
> > >> > > >>
> > >> > > >> > no:
> > >> > > >> >
> > >> > > >> > private void wblLog(Level level, String
> > > messageKey)
> > >> > > >> > {
> > >> > > >> > if (logger.isLoggable(level))
> > >> > > >> > {
> > >> > > >> > logger.logp(level, caller.getName(),
> > >> > > >> >
> > > Thread.currentThread().getStackTrace()[3].getMethodName(),
> > >> > > > messageKey);
> > >> > > >> > }
> > >> > > >> > }
> > >> > > >> >
> > >> > > >> > well if we move to natve JUL we'll need to
> > > keep a factory to
> > >> allow
> > >> > > >> > subclasses to switch of implementation as cxf
> > > does.
> > >> > > >> >
> > >> > > >> > - Romain
> > >> > > >> >
> > >> > > >> >
> > >> > > >> >
> > >> > > >> > 2012/6/11 Mark Struberg
> > >> > > >> >
> > >> > > >> >> +1
> > >> > > >> >>
> > >> > > >> >> The getStackTrace only hits us if we throw an
> > > Exception, right?
> > >> > > > The
> > >> > > >> >> problem is that due to the additional wrapper
> > > handler we always
> > >> > > > have a
> > >> > > >> >> 'mismatch' in the StackTrace...
> > >> > > >> >>
> > >> > > >> >> I'm tempted to move to native jul
> > > anyway...
> > >> > > >> >>
> > >> > > >> >>
> > >> > > >> >> LieGrue,
> > >> > > >> >> strub
> > >> > > >> >>
> > >> > > >> >>
> > >> > > >> >>
> > >> > > >> >> - Original Message -
> > >> > > >> >> > From: Romain Manni-Bucau
> > >
> > >> > > >> >> > To: dev@openwebbeans.apache.org
> > >> > > >> >> > Cc:
> > >> > > >> >> > Sent: Monday, June 11, 2012 1:28 PM
> > >> > > >> >> > Subject: new logger api?
> > >> > > >> >> >
> > >> > > >> >> > Hi,
> > >> > > >> >> >
> > >> > > >> >> > just created
> > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-674
> > >> > > >> >> >
> > >> > > >> >> > any thought about it?
> > >> > > >> >> >
> > >> > > >> >> > the goal is mainly to allow to use
> > > something else than JUL.
> > >> > > > The
> > >> > > >> proposed
> > >> > > >> >> > patch uses a system property but it can
> > > be something else.
> > >> > > >> >> >
> > >> > > >> >> > The other topic of this jira is the usage
> > > of getStackTrace()
> > >> > > > in the
> > >> > > >> JUL
> > >> > > >> >> > implementation which is too costly IMO.
> > >> > > >> >> >
> > >> > > >> >> > - Romain
> > >> > > >> >> >
> > >> > > >> >>
> > >> > > >> >
> > >> > > >> >
> > >> > > >>
> > >> > > >
> > >> > >
> > >> >
> > >>
> > >
> >
>
Re: new logger api?
mainly what was done in the patch of
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-674 (maybe a bit too much but was
done ;))
- Romain
2012/6/25 Jean-Louis MONTEIRO
> I guess a new thread must be opened with [VOTE].
> Anyway, if we wanna support other logging API, may be we could just review
> the factory.
>
> Thoughts?
>
> JLouis
>
> 2012/6/25 Romain Manni-Bucau
>
> > I think questions are:
> > 1) do we remove WebBeansLogger? --> JUL
> > 2) do we add a thin layer to allow to use other logging API? (add or
> reuse
> > if we go for slf4j for instance)
> >
> > - Romain
> >
> >
> > 2012/6/25 Mark Struberg
> >
> > > full ack, yeaaa we found a volunteer - txs romain :D
> > >
> > >
> > > Nah, serious. We should do a VOTE about whether to remove the
> > > WebBeansLogger or not.
> > >
> > > LieGrue,
> > > strub
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > - Original Message -
> > > > From: Jean-Louis MONTEIRO
> > > > To: dev@openwebbeans.apache.org
> > > > Cc:
> > > > Sent: Monday, June 25, 2012 10:46 AM
> > > > Subject: Re: new logger api?
> > > >
> > > > Mark,
> > > >
> > > > That be a good starting point for me to submit a patch if you agree.
> > > >
> > > > Jean-Louis
> > > >
> > > > 2012/6/25 Romain Manni-Bucau
> > > >
> > > >> Or friends ;)
> > > >> Le 25 juin 2012 08:26, "Jean-Louis MONTEIRO"
> > > > a écrit
> > > >> :
> > > >>
> > > >> > You still have nights ;-)
> > > >> >
> > > >> >
> > > >> > Was a joke, sorry.
> > > >> > JLouis
> > > >> >
> > > >> > 2012/6/25 Mark Struberg
> > > >> >
> > > >> > > gimme a few days plz, currently holding workshops the next 2
> > > > days.
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > LieGrue,
> > > >> > > strub
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > - Original Message -
> > > >> > > > From: Jean-Louis MONTEIRO
> > > >> > > > To: dev@openwebbeans.apache.org
> > > >> > > > Cc:
> > > >> > > > Sent: Monday, June 25, 2012 8:15 AM
> > > >> > > > Subject: Re: new logger api?
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > > Yes, that will make things simpler to integrate ;-)
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > > JLouis
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > > 2012/6/25 Romain Manni-Bucau
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > > >> any other opinion?
> > > >> > > >>
> > > >> > > >> do we move to JULI directly?
> > > >> > > >>
> > > >> > > >> - Romain
> > > >> > > >>
> > > >> > > >>
> > > >> > > >> 2012/6/11 Romain Manni-Bucau
> > > >
> > > >> > > >>
> > > >> > > >> > no:
> > > >> > > >> >
> > > >> > > >> > private void wblLog(Level level, String
> > > > messageKey)
> > > >> > > >> > {
> > > >> > > >> > if (logger.isLoggable(level))
> > > >> > > >> > {
> > > >> > > >> > logger.logp(level, caller.getName(),
> > > >> > > >> >
> > > > Thread.currentThread().getStackTrace()[3].getMethodName(),
> > > >> > > > messageKey);
> > > >> > > >> > }
> > > >> > > >> > }
> > > >> > > >> >
> > > >> > > >> > well if we move to natve JUL we'll need to
> > > > keep a factory to
> > > >> allow
> > > >> > > >> > subclasses to switch of implementation as cxf
> > > > does.
> > > >> > > >> >
> > > >> > > >> > - Romain
> > > >> > > >> >
> > > >> > > >> >
> > > >> > > >> >
> > > >> > > >> > 2012/6/11 Mark Struberg
> > > >> > > >> >
> > > >> > > >> >> +1
> > > >> > > >> >>
> > > >> > > >> >> The getStackTrace only hits us if we throw an
> > > > Exception, right?
> > > >> > > > The
> > > >> > > >> >> problem is that due to the additional wrapper
> > > > handler we always
> > > >> > > > have a
> > > >> > > >> >> 'mismatch' in the StackTrace...
> > > >> > > >> >>
> > > >> > > >> >> I'm tempted to move to native jul
> > > > anyway...
> > > >> > > >> >>
> > > >> > > >> >>
> > > >> > > >> >> LieGrue,
> > > >> > > >> >> strub
> > > >> > > >> >>
> > > >> > > >> >>
> > > >> > > >> >>
> > > >> > > >> >> - Original Message -
> > > >> > > >> >> > From: Romain Manni-Bucau
> > > >
> > > >> > > >> >> > To: dev@openwebbeans.apache.org
> > > >> > > >> >> > Cc:
> > > >> > > >> >> > Sent: Monday, June 11, 2012 1:28 PM
> > > >> > > >> >> > Subject: new logger api?
> > > >> > > >> >> >
> > > >> > > >> >> > Hi,
> > > >> > > >> >> >
> > > >> > > >> >> > just created
> > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-674
> > > >> > > >> >> >
> > > >> > > >> >> > any thought about it?
> > > >> > > >> >> >
> > > >> > > >> >> > the goal is mainly to allow to use
> > > > something else than JUL.
> > > >> > > > The
> > > >> > > >> proposed
> > > >> > > >> >> > patch uses a system property but it can
> > > > be something else.
> > > >> > > >> >> >
> > > >> > > >> >> > The other topic of this jira is the usage
> > > > of getStackTrace()
> > > >> > > > in the
> > > >> > > >> JUL
> > > >> > > >> >> > implementation which is too costly IMO.
> > > >> > > >> >> >
> > > >> > > >> >> > - Romain
> > > >> > > >> >> >
> > > >> > > >> >>
> > > >> > > >> >
> > > >> > > >> >
> > > >> > > >>
> > > >> > > >
> > > >> > >
> > > >> >
> > > >>
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
Re: new logger api?
Hi devs,
As discussed, just submitted the patch file to change the Logger API over
the project.
It now contains a factory with a default implementation based on JUL.
If someone can review it, that'd be great cause a lot of file changed so
the sooner, the better to merge/integrate.
Hope it help,
Jean-Louis
2012/6/25 Romain Manni-Bucau
> mainly what was done in the patch of
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-674 (maybe a bit too much but
> was
> done ;))
>
> - Romain
>
>
> 2012/6/25 Jean-Louis MONTEIRO
>
> > I guess a new thread must be opened with [VOTE].
> > Anyway, if we wanna support other logging API, may be we could just
> review
> > the factory.
> >
> > Thoughts?
> >
> > JLouis
> >
> > 2012/6/25 Romain Manni-Bucau
> >
> > > I think questions are:
> > > 1) do we remove WebBeansLogger? --> JUL
> > > 2) do we add a thin layer to allow to use other logging API? (add or
> > reuse
> > > if we go for slf4j for instance)
> > >
> > > - Romain
> > >
> > >
> > > 2012/6/25 Mark Struberg
> > >
> > > > full ack, yeaaa we found a volunteer - txs romain :D
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Nah, serious. We should do a VOTE about whether to remove the
> > > > WebBeansLogger or not.
> > > >
> > > > LieGrue,
> > > > strub
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > - Original Message -
> > > > > From: Jean-Louis MONTEIRO
> > > > > To: dev@openwebbeans.apache.org
> > > > > Cc:
> > > > > Sent: Monday, June 25, 2012 10:46 AM
> > > > > Subject: Re: new logger api?
> > > > >
> > > > > Mark,
> > > > >
> > > > > That be a good starting point for me to submit a patch if you
> agree.
> > > > >
> > > > > Jean-Louis
> > > > >
> > > > > 2012/6/25 Romain Manni-Bucau
> > > > >
> > > > >> Or friends ;)
> > > > >> Le 25 juin 2012 08:26, "Jean-Louis MONTEIRO"
> > > > > a écrit
> > > > >> :
> > > > >>
> > > > >> > You still have nights ;-)
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > Was a joke, sorry.
> > > > >> > JLouis
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > 2012/6/25 Mark Struberg
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > > gimme a few days plz, currently holding workshops the next 2
> > > > > days.
> > > > >> > >
> > > > >> > > LieGrue,
> > > > >> > > strub
> > > > >> > >
> > > > >> > >
> > > > >> > >
> > > > >> > > - Original Message -
> > > > >> > > > From: Jean-Louis MONTEIRO
> > > > >> > > > To: dev@openwebbeans.apache.org
> > > > >> > > > Cc:
> > > > >> > > > Sent: Monday, June 25, 2012 8:15 AM
> > > > >> > > > Subject: Re: new logger api?
> > > > >> > > >
> > > > >> > > > Yes, that will make things simpler to integrate ;-)
> > > > >> > > >
> > > > >> > > > JLouis
> > > > >> > > >
> > > > >> > > > 2012/6/25 Romain Manni-Bucau
> > > > >> > > >
> > > > >> > > >> any other opinion?
> > > > >> > > >>
> > > > >> > > >> do we move to JULI directly?
> > > > >> > > >>
> > > > >> > > >> - Romain
> > > > >> > > >>
> > > > >> > > >>
> > > > >> > > >> 2012/6/11 Romain Manni-Bucau
> > > > >
> > > > >> > > >>
> > > > >> > > >> > no:
> > > > >> > > >> >
> > > > >> > > >> > private void wblLog(Level level, String
> > > > > messageKey)
> > > > >> > > >> > {
> > > > >> > > >> > if (logg
Re: new logger api?
Hi! Thanks folks! Will review it this afternoon. LieGrue, strub - Original Message - > From: Jean-Louis MONTEIRO > To: dev@openwebbeans.apache.org > Cc: > Sent: Monday, July 16, 2012 9:59 AM > Subject: Re: new logger api? > > Hi devs, > > As discussed, just submitted the patch file to change the Logger API over > the project. > It now contains a factory with a default implementation based on JUL. > > If someone can review it, that'd be great cause a lot of file changed so > the sooner, the better to merge/integrate. > > Hope it help, > Jean-Louis > > 2012/6/25 Romain Manni-Bucau > >> mainly what was done in the patch of >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-674 (maybe a bit too much but >> was >> done ;)) >> >> - Romain >> >> >> 2012/6/25 Jean-Louis MONTEIRO >> >> > I guess a new thread must be opened with [VOTE]. >> > Anyway, if we wanna support other logging API, may be we could just >> review >> > the factory. >> > >> > Thoughts? >> > >> > JLouis >> > >> > 2012/6/25 Romain Manni-Bucau >> > >> > > I think questions are: >> > > 1) do we remove WebBeansLogger? --> JUL >> > > 2) do we add a thin layer to allow to use other logging API? (add > or >> > reuse >> > > if we go for slf4j for instance) >> > > >> > > - Romain >> > > >> > > >> > > 2012/6/25 Mark Struberg >> > > >> > > > full ack, yeaaa we found a volunteer - txs romain :D >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > Nah, serious. We should do a VOTE about whether to remove > the >> > > > WebBeansLogger or not. >> > > > >> > > > LieGrue, >> > > > strub >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > - Original Message - >> > > > > From: Jean-Louis MONTEIRO >> > > > > To: dev@openwebbeans.apache.org >> > > > > Cc: >> > > > > Sent: Monday, June 25, 2012 10:46 AM >> > > > > Subject: Re: new logger api? >> > > > > >> > > > > Mark, >> > > > > >> > > > > That be a good starting point for me to submit a patch > if you >> agree. >> > > > > >> > > > > Jean-Louis >> > > > > >> > > > > 2012/6/25 Romain Manni-Bucau > >> > > > > >> > > > >> Or friends ;) >> > > > >> Le 25 juin 2012 08:26, "Jean-Louis > MONTEIRO" >> > > > > a écrit >> > > > >> : >> > > > >> >> > > > >> > You still have nights ;-) >> > > > >> > >> > > > >> > >> > > > >> > Was a joke, sorry. >> > > > >> > JLouis >> > > > >> > >> > > > >> > 2012/6/25 Mark Struberg > >> > > > >> > >> > > > >> > > gimme a few days plz, currently holding > workshops the next 2 >> > > > > days. >> > > > >> > > >> > > > >> > > LieGrue, >> > > > >> > > strub >> > > > >> > > >> > > > >> > > >> > > > >> > > >> > > > >> > > - Original Message - >> > > > >> > > > From: Jean-Louis MONTEIRO > >> > > > >> > > > To: dev@openwebbeans.apache.org >> > > > >> > > > Cc: >> > > > >> > > > Sent: Monday, June 25, 2012 8:15 AM >> > > > >> > > > Subject: Re: new logger api? >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > Yes, that will make things simpler > to integrate ;-) >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > JLouis >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > 2012/6/25 Romain Manni-Bucau > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >>
Re: new logger api?
Hi, hope will be fine since we discussed of it together ;) the only interrogation point is about webbeansloggerfacade which could be split with a messageutil class but for me that's mainly fine :) - Romain 2012/7/16 Mark Struberg > Hi! > > Thanks folks! > Will review it this afternoon. > > LieGrue, > strub > > > > - Original Message - > > From: Jean-Louis MONTEIRO > > To: dev@openwebbeans.apache.org > > Cc: > > Sent: Monday, July 16, 2012 9:59 AM > > Subject: Re: new logger api? > > > > Hi devs, > > > > As discussed, just submitted the patch file to change the Logger API over > > the project. > > It now contains a factory with a default implementation based on JUL. > > > > If someone can review it, that'd be great cause a lot of file changed so > > the sooner, the better to merge/integrate. > > > > Hope it help, > > Jean-Louis > > > > 2012/6/25 Romain Manni-Bucau > > > >> mainly what was done in the patch of > >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-674 (maybe a bit too much > but > >> was > >> done ;)) > >> > >> - Romain > >> > >> > >> 2012/6/25 Jean-Louis MONTEIRO > >> > >> > I guess a new thread must be opened with [VOTE]. > >> > Anyway, if we wanna support other logging API, may be we could just > >> review > >> > the factory. > >> > > >> > Thoughts? > >> > > >> > JLouis > >> > > >> > 2012/6/25 Romain Manni-Bucau > >> > > >> > > I think questions are: > >> > > 1) do we remove WebBeansLogger? --> JUL > >> > > 2) do we add a thin layer to allow to use other logging API? (add > > or > >> > reuse > >> > > if we go for slf4j for instance) > >> > > > >> > > - Romain > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > 2012/6/25 Mark Struberg > >> > > > >> > > > full ack, yeaaa we found a volunteer - txs romain :D > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > Nah, serious. We should do a VOTE about whether to remove > > the > >> > > > WebBeansLogger or not. > >> > > > > >> > > > LieGrue, > >> > > > strub > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > - Original Message - > >> > > > > From: Jean-Louis MONTEIRO > >> > > > > To: dev@openwebbeans.apache.org > >> > > > > Cc: > >> > > > > Sent: Monday, June 25, 2012 10:46 AM > >> > > > > Subject: Re: new logger api? > >> > > > > > >> > > > > Mark, > >> > > > > > >> > > > > That be a good starting point for me to submit a patch > > if you > >> agree. > >> > > > > > >> > > > > Jean-Louis > >> > > > > > >> > > > > 2012/6/25 Romain Manni-Bucau > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> Or friends ;) > >> > > > >> Le 25 juin 2012 08:26, "Jean-Louis > > MONTEIRO" > >> > > > > a écrit > >> > > > >> : > >> > > > >> > >> > > > >> > You still have nights ;-) > >> > > > >> > > >> > > > >> > > >> > > > >> > Was a joke, sorry. > >> > > > >> > JLouis > >> > > > >> > > >> > > > >> > 2012/6/25 Mark Struberg > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > > > >> > > gimme a few days plz, currently holding > > workshops the next 2 > >> > > > > days. > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > LieGrue, > >> > > > >> > > strub > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > - Original Message - > >> > > > >> > > > From: Jean-Louis MONTEIRO > &g
Re: new logger api?
patch looks fine! LieGrue, strub - Original Message - > From: Romain Manni-Bucau > To: dev@openwebbeans.apache.org; Mark Struberg > Cc: > Sent: Monday, July 16, 2012 11:03 AM > Subject: Re: new logger api? > > Hi, > > hope will be fine since we discussed of it together ;) > > > the only interrogation point is about webbeansloggerfacade which could be > split with a messageutil class but for me that's mainly fine :) > > - Romain > > > 2012/7/16 Mark Struberg > >> Hi! >> >> Thanks folks! >> Will review it this afternoon. >> >> LieGrue, >> strub >> >> >> >> - Original Message - >> > From: Jean-Louis MONTEIRO >> > To: dev@openwebbeans.apache.org >> > Cc: >> > Sent: Monday, July 16, 2012 9:59 AM >> > Subject: Re: new logger api? >> > >> > Hi devs, >> > >> > As discussed, just submitted the patch file to change the Logger API > over >> > the project. >> > It now contains a factory with a default implementation based on JUL. >> > >> > If someone can review it, that'd be great cause a lot of file > changed so >> > the sooner, the better to merge/integrate. >> > >> > Hope it help, >> > Jean-Louis >> > >> > 2012/6/25 Romain Manni-Bucau >> > >> >> mainly what was done in the patch of >> >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-674 (maybe a bit too > much >> but >> >> was >> >> done ;)) >> >> >> >> - Romain >> >> >> >> >> >> 2012/6/25 Jean-Louis MONTEIRO >> >> >> >> > I guess a new thread must be opened with [VOTE]. >> >> > Anyway, if we wanna support other logging API, may be we > could just >> >> review >> >> > the factory. >> >> > >> >> > Thoughts? >> >> > >> >> > JLouis >> >> > >> >> > 2012/6/25 Romain Manni-Bucau >> >> > >> >> > > I think questions are: >> >> > > 1) do we remove WebBeansLogger? --> JUL >> >> > > 2) do we add a thin layer to allow to use other logging > API? (add >> > or >> >> > reuse >> >> > > if we go for slf4j for instance) >> >> > > >> >> > > - Romain >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > > 2012/6/25 Mark Struberg >> >> > > >> >> > > > full ack, yeaaa we found a volunteer - txs romain > :D >> >> > > > >> >> > > > >> >> > > > Nah, serious. We should do a VOTE about whether to > remove >> > the >> >> > > > WebBeansLogger or not. >> >> > > > >> >> > > > LieGrue, >> >> > > > strub >> >> > > > >> >> > > > >> >> > > > >> >> > > > - Original Message - >> >> > > > > From: Jean-Louis MONTEIRO > >> >> > > > > To: dev@openwebbeans.apache.org >> >> > > > > Cc: >> >> > > > > Sent: Monday, June 25, 2012 10:46 AM >> >> > > > > Subject: Re: new logger api? >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > > Mark, >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > > That be a good starting point for me to > submit a patch >> > if you >> >> agree. >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > > Jean-Louis >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > > 2012/6/25 Romain Manni-Bucau >> > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > >> Or friends ;) >> >> > > > >> Le 25 juin 2012 08:26, "Jean-Louis >> > MONTEIRO" >> >> > > > > a écrit >> >> > > > >> : >> >> > > > >> >> >> > > > >> > You still have nights ;-) >> >> > > > >> > >> >> > > > >> > >> >>
Re: new logger api?
Cool, thx for reviewing so quickly. Jean louis Le 16 juil. 2012 20:16, "Mark Struberg" a écrit : > patch looks fine! > > LieGrue, > strub > > > > - Original Message - > > From: Romain Manni-Bucau > > To: dev@openwebbeans.apache.org; Mark Struberg > > Cc: > > Sent: Monday, July 16, 2012 11:03 AM > > Subject: Re: new logger api? > > > > Hi, > > > > hope will be fine since we discussed of it together ;) > > > > > > the only interrogation point is about webbeansloggerfacade which could be > > split with a messageutil class but for me that's mainly fine :) > > > > - Romain > > > > > > 2012/7/16 Mark Struberg > > > >> Hi! > >> > >> Thanks folks! > >> Will review it this afternoon. > >> > >> LieGrue, > >> strub > >> > >> > >> > >> - Original Message - > >> > From: Jean-Louis MONTEIRO > >> > To: dev@openwebbeans.apache.org > >> > Cc: > >> > Sent: Monday, July 16, 2012 9:59 AM > >> > Subject: Re: new logger api? > >> > > >> > Hi devs, > >> > > >> > As discussed, just submitted the patch file to change the Logger API > > over > >> > the project. > >> > It now contains a factory with a default implementation based on JUL. > >> > > >> > If someone can review it, that'd be great cause a lot of file > > changed so > >> > the sooner, the better to merge/integrate. > >> > > >> > Hope it help, > >> > Jean-Louis > >> > > >> > 2012/6/25 Romain Manni-Bucau > >> > > >> >> mainly what was done in the patch of > >> >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-674 (maybe a bit too > > much > >> but > >> >> was > >> >> done ;)) > >> >> > >> >> - Romain > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> 2012/6/25 Jean-Louis MONTEIRO > >> >> > >> >> > I guess a new thread must be opened with [VOTE]. > >> >> > Anyway, if we wanna support other logging API, may be we > > could just > >> >> review > >> >> > the factory. > >> >> > > >> >> > Thoughts? > >> >> > > >> >> > JLouis > >> >> > > >> >> > 2012/6/25 Romain Manni-Bucau > >> >> > > >> >> > > I think questions are: > >> >> > > 1) do we remove WebBeansLogger? --> JUL > >> >> > > 2) do we add a thin layer to allow to use other logging > > API? (add > >> > or > >> >> > reuse > >> >> > > if we go for slf4j for instance) > >> >> > > > >> >> > > - Romain > >> >> > > > >> >> > > > >> >> > > 2012/6/25 Mark Struberg > >> >> > > > >> >> > > > full ack, yeaaa we found a volunteer - txs romain > > :D > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > Nah, serious. We should do a VOTE about whether to > > remove > >> > the > >> >> > > > WebBeansLogger or not. > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > LieGrue, > >> >> > > > strub > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > - Original Message - > >> >> > > > > From: Jean-Louis MONTEIRO > > > >> >> > > > > To: dev@openwebbeans.apache.org > >> >> > > > > Cc: > >> >> > > > > Sent: Monday, June 25, 2012 10:46 AM > >> >> > > > > Subject: Re: new logger api? > >> >> > > > > > >> >> > > > > Mark, > >> >> > > > > > >> >> > > > > That be a good starting point for me to > > submit a patch > >> > if you > >> >> agree. > >> >> > > > > > >> >> > &
Re: new logger api?
pushed it Thks JL! - Romain 2012/7/16 Jean-Louis MONTEIRO > Cool, thx for reviewing so quickly. > Jean louis > Le 16 juil. 2012 20:16, "Mark Struberg" a écrit : > > > patch looks fine! > > > > LieGrue, > > strub > > > > > > > > - Original Message - > > > From: Romain Manni-Bucau > > > To: dev@openwebbeans.apache.org; Mark Struberg > > > Cc: > > > Sent: Monday, July 16, 2012 11:03 AM > > > Subject: Re: new logger api? > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > hope will be fine since we discussed of it together ;) > > > > > > > > > the only interrogation point is about webbeansloggerfacade which could > be > > > split with a messageutil class but for me that's mainly fine :) > > > > > > - Romain > > > > > > > > > 2012/7/16 Mark Struberg > > > > > >> Hi! > > >> > > >> Thanks folks! > > >> Will review it this afternoon. > > >> > > >> LieGrue, > > >> strub > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> - Original Message - > > >> > From: Jean-Louis MONTEIRO > > >> > To: dev@openwebbeans.apache.org > > >> > Cc: > > >> > Sent: Monday, July 16, 2012 9:59 AM > > >> > Subject: Re: new logger api? > > >> > > > >> > Hi devs, > > >> > > > >> > As discussed, just submitted the patch file to change the Logger > API > > > over > > >> > the project. > > >> > It now contains a factory with a default implementation based on > JUL. > > >> > > > >> > If someone can review it, that'd be great cause a lot of file > > > changed so > > >> > the sooner, the better to merge/integrate. > > >> > > > >> > Hope it help, > > >> > Jean-Louis > > >> > > > >> > 2012/6/25 Romain Manni-Bucau > > >> > > > >> >> mainly what was done in the patch of > > >> >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-674 (maybe a bit too > > > much > > >> but > > >> >> was > > >> >> done ;)) > > >> >> > > >> >> - Romain > > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> 2012/6/25 Jean-Louis MONTEIRO > > >> >> > > >> >> > I guess a new thread must be opened with [VOTE]. > > >> >> > Anyway, if we wanna support other logging API, may be we > > > could just > > >> >> review > > >> >> > the factory. > > >> >> > > > >> >> > Thoughts? > > >> >> > > > >> >> > JLouis > > >> >> > > > >> >> > 2012/6/25 Romain Manni-Bucau > > >> >> > > > >> >> > > I think questions are: > > >> >> > > 1) do we remove WebBeansLogger? --> JUL > > >> >> > > 2) do we add a thin layer to allow to use other logging > > > API? (add > > >> > or > > >> >> > reuse > > >> >> > > if we go for slf4j for instance) > > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > - Romain > > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > 2012/6/25 Mark Struberg > > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > > full ack, yeaaa we found a volunteer - txs romain > > > :D > > >> >> > > > > > >> >> > > > > > >> >> > > > Nah, serious. We should do a VOTE about whether to > > > remove > > >> > the > > >> >> > > > WebBeansLogger or not. > > >> >> > > > > > >> >> > > > LieGrue, > > >> >> > > > strub > > >> >> > > > > > >> >> > > > > > >> >> > > > > > >> >> > > > - Original Message - > > >> >> > > > > From: Jean-Louis MONTEIRO > > > > > >> >> > > > >
Re: new logger api?
Thanks Romain. If there is another area where I can dig into, that'd be a pleasure. JLouis 2012/7/16 Romain Manni-Bucau > pushed it > > Thks JL! > > - Romain > > > 2012/7/16 Jean-Louis MONTEIRO > > > Cool, thx for reviewing so quickly. > > Jean louis > > Le 16 juil. 2012 20:16, "Mark Struberg" a écrit : > > > > > patch looks fine! > > > > > > LieGrue, > > > strub > > > > > > > > > > > > - Original Message - > > > > From: Romain Manni-Bucau > > > > To: dev@openwebbeans.apache.org; Mark Struberg > > > > Cc: > > > > Sent: Monday, July 16, 2012 11:03 AM > > > > Subject: Re: new logger api? > > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > hope will be fine since we discussed of it together ;) > > > > > > > > > > > > the only interrogation point is about webbeansloggerfacade which > could > > be > > > > split with a messageutil class but for me that's mainly fine :) > > > > > > > > - Romain > > > > > > > > > > > > 2012/7/16 Mark Struberg > > > > > > > >> Hi! > > > >> > > > >> Thanks folks! > > > >> Will review it this afternoon. > > > >> > > > >> LieGrue, > > > >> strub > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> - Original Message - > > > >> > From: Jean-Louis MONTEIRO > > > >> > To: dev@openwebbeans.apache.org > > > >> > Cc: > > > >> > Sent: Monday, July 16, 2012 9:59 AM > > > >> > Subject: Re: new logger api? > > > >> > > > > >> > Hi devs, > > > >> > > > > >> > As discussed, just submitted the patch file to change the Logger > > API > > > > over > > > >> > the project. > > > >> > It now contains a factory with a default implementation based on > > JUL. > > > >> > > > > >> > If someone can review it, that'd be great cause a lot of file > > > > changed so > > > >> > the sooner, the better to merge/integrate. > > > >> > > > > >> > Hope it help, > > > >> > Jean-Louis > > > >> > > > > >> > 2012/6/25 Romain Manni-Bucau > > > >> > > > > >> >> mainly what was done in the patch of > > > >> >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-674 (maybe a bit too > > > > much > > > >> but > > > >> >> was > > > >> >> done ;)) > > > >> >> > > > >> >> - Romain > > > >> >> > > > >> >> > > > >> >> 2012/6/25 Jean-Louis MONTEIRO > > > >> >> > > > >> >> > I guess a new thread must be opened with [VOTE]. > > > >> >> > Anyway, if we wanna support other logging API, may be we > > > > could just > > > >> >> review > > > >> >> > the factory. > > > >> >> > > > > >> >> > Thoughts? > > > >> >> > > > > >> >> > JLouis > > > >> >> > > > > >> >> > 2012/6/25 Romain Manni-Bucau > > > >> >> > > > > >> >> > > I think questions are: > > > >> >> > > 1) do we remove WebBeansLogger? --> JUL > > > >> >> > > 2) do we add a thin layer to allow to use other logging > > > > API? (add > > > >> > or > > > >> >> > reuse > > > >> >> > > if we go for slf4j for instance) > > > >> >> > > > > > >> >> > > - Romain > > > >> >> > > > > > >> >> > > > > > >> >> > > 2012/6/25 Mark Struberg > > > >> >> > > > > > >> >> > > > full ack, yeaaa we found a volunteer - txs romain > > > > :D > > > >> >> > > > > > > >> >
Re: new logger api?
Hi Jean-Louis! There is always work to do! :) I try to quickly fix a few last bugs and then we head to 1.1.5. After that there will be a lot to work on again. LieGrue, strub - Original Message - > From: Jean-Louis MONTEIRO > To: dev@openwebbeans.apache.org > Cc: > Sent: Tuesday, July 17, 2012 8:44 AM > Subject: Re: new logger api? > >T hanks Romain. > If there is another area where I can dig into, that'd be a pleasure. > > JLouis > > 2012/7/16 Romain Manni-Bucau > >> pushed it >> >> Thks JL! >> >> - Romain >> >> >> 2012/7/16 Jean-Louis MONTEIRO >> >> > Cool, thx for reviewing so quickly. >> > Jean louis >> > Le 16 juil. 2012 20:16, "Mark Struberg" > a écrit : >> > >> > > patch looks fine! >> > > >> > > LieGrue, >> > > strub >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > - Original Message - >> > > > From: Romain Manni-Bucau >> > > > To: dev@openwebbeans.apache.org; Mark Struberg > >> > > > Cc: >> > > > Sent: Monday, July 16, 2012 11:03 AM >> > > > Subject: Re: new logger api? >> > > > >> > > > Hi, >> > > > >> > > > hope will be fine since we discussed of it together ;) >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > the only interrogation point is about webbeansloggerfacade > which >> could >> > be >> > > > split with a messageutil class but for me that's mainly > fine :) >> > > > >> > > > - Romain >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > 2012/7/16 Mark Struberg >> > > > >> > > >> Hi! >> > > >> >> > > >> Thanks folks! >> > > >> Will review it this afternoon. >> > > >> >> > > >> LieGrue, >> > > >> strub >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> - Original Message - >> > > >> > From: Jean-Louis MONTEIRO > >> > > >> > To: dev@openwebbeans.apache.org >> > > >> > Cc: >> > > >> > Sent: Monday, July 16, 2012 9:59 AM >> > > >> > Subject: Re: new logger api? >> > > >> > >> > > >> > Hi devs, >> > > >> > >> > > >> > As discussed, just submitted the patch file to > change the Logger >> > API >> > > > over >> > > >> > the project. >> > > >> > It now contains a factory with a default > implementation based on >> > JUL. >> > > >> > >> > > >> > If someone can review it, that'd be great > cause a lot of file >> > > > changed so >> > > >> > the sooner, the better to merge/integrate. >> > > >> > >> > > >> > Hope it help, >> > > >> > Jean-Louis >> > > >> > >> > > >> > 2012/6/25 Romain Manni-Bucau > >> > > >> > >> > > >> >> mainly what was done in the patch of >> > > >> >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-674 > (maybe a bit too >> > > > much >> > > >> but >> > > >> >> was >> > > >> >> done ;)) >> > > >> >> >> > > >> >> - Romain >> > > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > > >> >> 2012/6/25 Jean-Louis MONTEIRO > >> > > >> >> >> > > >> >> > I guess a new thread must be opened with > [VOTE]. >> > > >> >> > Anyway, if we wanna support other > logging API, may be we >> > > > could just >> > > >> >> review >> > > >> >> > the factory. >> > > >> >> > >> > > >> >> > Thoughts? >> > > >> >> > >> > > >> >> > JLouis >> > > >> >> > >> > > >> >> > 2012/6
Re: new logger api?
Hi, Ok, I will stay tuned. In the mid time, I can work to release OpenEJB/TomEE. Jean-Louis 2012/7/17 Mark Struberg > Hi Jean-Louis! > > There is always work to do! :) > > I try to quickly fix a few last bugs and then we head to 1.1.5. After that > there will be a lot to work on again. > > LieGrue, > strub > > > > - Original Message - > > From: Jean-Louis MONTEIRO > > To: dev@openwebbeans.apache.org > > Cc: > > Sent: Tuesday, July 17, 2012 8:44 AM > > Subject: Re: new logger api? > > > >T hanks Romain. > > If there is another area where I can dig into, that'd be a pleasure. > > > > JLouis > > > > 2012/7/16 Romain Manni-Bucau > > > >> pushed it > >> > >> Thks JL! > >> > >> - Romain > >> > >> > >> 2012/7/16 Jean-Louis MONTEIRO > >> > >> > Cool, thx for reviewing so quickly. > >> > Jean louis > >> > Le 16 juil. 2012 20:16, "Mark Struberg" > > a écrit : > >> > > >> > > patch looks fine! > >> > > > >> > > LieGrue, > >> > > strub > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > - Original Message - > >> > > > From: Romain Manni-Bucau > >> > > > To: dev@openwebbeans.apache.org; Mark Struberg > > > >> > > > Cc: > >> > > > Sent: Monday, July 16, 2012 11:03 AM > >> > > > Subject: Re: new logger api? > >> > > > > >> > > > Hi, > >> > > > > >> > > > hope will be fine since we discussed of it together ;) > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > the only interrogation point is about webbeansloggerfacade > > which > >> could > >> > be > >> > > > split with a messageutil class but for me that's mainly > > fine :) > >> > > > > >> > > > - Romain > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > 2012/7/16 Mark Struberg > >> > > > > >> > > >> Hi! > >> > > >> > >> > > >> Thanks folks! > >> > > >> Will review it this afternoon. > >> > > >> > >> > > >> LieGrue, > >> > > >> strub > >> > > >> > >> > > >> > >> > > >> > >> > > >> - Original Message - > >> > > >> > From: Jean-Louis MONTEIRO > > > >> > > >> > To: dev@openwebbeans.apache.org > >> > > >> > Cc: > >> > > >> > Sent: Monday, July 16, 2012 9:59 AM > >> > > >> > Subject: Re: new logger api? > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > Hi devs, > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > As discussed, just submitted the patch file to > > change the Logger > >> > API > >> > > > over > >> > > >> > the project. > >> > > >> > It now contains a factory with a default > > implementation based on > >> > JUL. > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > If someone can review it, that'd be great > > cause a lot of file > >> > > > changed so > >> > > >> > the sooner, the better to merge/integrate. > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > Hope it help, > >> > > >> > Jean-Louis > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > 2012/6/25 Romain Manni-Bucau > > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> >> mainly what was done in the patch of > >> > > >> >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OWB-674 > > (maybe a bit too > >> > > > much > >> > > >> but > >> > > >> >> was > >> > > >> >> done ;)) > >> > > >> >> > >> > > >> >> - Romain > >> > > >> >> > >> > > >> >> > >> > > >> >> 2012/6/25 Jean-Louis MONTEIRO > > > >
